Talk:Tony Blair

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tony Blair article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9: 365 days

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Tony Blair is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 28, 2005.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 19, 2004	Featured article candidate	Promoted
May 26, 2006	Featured article review	Kept
June 19, 2007	Featured article review	Demoted
July 4, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed
April 18, 2011	Good article nominee	Not listed
Current status: Former featured article

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Template:Vital article

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Politics and Government B‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as High-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Law B‑class Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Business B‑class Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

England B‑class Top‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Scotland B‑class High‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

University of Oxford B‑class Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Politics of the United Kingdom B‑class Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Socialism B‑class High‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Organized Labour B‑class High‑importance

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WP1.0

Other talk page banners

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2007.

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Stephen Foley (2009-02-03). "Is Wikipedia cracking up?". Irish Independent.
"U.K.'s Blair Might Risk Revisiting Euro Question: Mark Gilbert". Bloomberg News. September 9, 2004.

This article was reviewed by The Independent on February 12, 2006.

Comments: "It is opinionated and written from an anti-war point of view."

-Note that this peer review referred to something like this version which was indeed POV, but that the POV was soon removed. David
For more information about external reviews of Wikipedia articles and about this review in particular, see this page.

A more up to date image

I recently changed the infobox image to a better image than the last one, but it is from 2012. Aren’t there any recent images of Blair free to use?--Emily19911991 (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent image on Commons is from 2020 here but it isn't of brilliant quality so I wouldn't choose it. There are many images of Tony Blair on Commons but not all of them would work as an infobox image.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:48, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to it not being up-to-date, the infobox image is definitely awkward and strange, Tony looks very angry 😆 Ak-eater06 (talk) 06:19, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't blame me, I don't like it either. There are threads above where I've said this. However, it has been restored to the infobox on several occasions after it was replaced. There needs to be a better consensus image.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:01, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I came to this talk page for exactly this reason. I agree, the picture being used is awful. 4Tildes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.125.143.178 (talk) 20:08, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also agree, but just because the picture being used has been restored to the infobox on several occasions after it was replaced does not mean we have to keep it that way. There appears to be a consensus not to use the current photo, so we should have a consensus on which photo to use instead. --79.66.82.129 (talk) 12:17, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should we change the infobox image?

Ak-eater06 (talk) 23:50, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:ianmacm your thoughts on changing the infobox image? Ak-eater06 (talk) 01:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've said numerous times that the current infobox image in which Blair has a weird fixed stare would not be my personal choice. Other people have also said that they are not fans of this image. My personal choice is this, which is cropped and edited from a 2009 image on Commons and has been used in the past.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:02, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:ianmacm I find your proposed image awkward as his mouth is wide open. What are your thoughts on my proposed image? Ak-eater06 (talk) 22:34, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok, but I'm not a great fan of his facial expression in this image either.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:01, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve recently came across this fairly recent image of Blair on the Commons and thought it would be a suitable image to have in the lead. @Ianmacm:, @Ak-eater06: – what do you both think? 2A01:4C8:1406:5988:8D8F:EF06:E212:536A (talk) 17:00, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed image #2 is OK and shows Blair in 2019. Again there is a slight problem with Blair's facial expression but it is better than some that have been suggested.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:24, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re this edit: I'm not sure why Neveselbert always reverts back to Tony Blair 2010 (cropped).jpg because it is by no means the best or most natural image of Blair. The image suggested in this edit is passable and gives a more natural look at Blair in action.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's a portrait taken by a professional photographer for the European Commission. It's the closest thing we have to an official portrait. I don't see how it's "unnatural"; his pose is the same as that of Vladimir Putin in his infobox image. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:48, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I feel as though a photograph of Blair during his premiership would be best for the article, as the majority of infobox images for UK Prime Ministers (Theresa May, Boris Johnson, etc) are from their premierships. So having Blair's infobox image be a photo from his premiership would make the most sense IMO. The proposed infobox image would work great as it's taken during Blair's premiership and is also used for his sidebar too. --88.108.44.8 (talk) 20:02, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the current image should be changed at all, but if it were to be changed it think it should be the one I've put forward. It's the closest thing we have to an actual official portrait. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 16:38, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

When it was announced tony blair would receive the queen's honour it sparked a mass petition asking for its removal.. 2A00:23C5:5080:6801:3DF4:131B:A51D:B0FF (talk) 23:18, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:34, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's true [1] and there are several petitions on change.org asking for the newly knighted Sir Tony to have the honour rescinded. Whether the article should mention this is debatable. Unlike the UK Parliament petitions website, anything said on change.org carries no weight with parliament. It's little more than a way for people to let off steam online.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:30, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's receiving news coverage, hence it is notable to mention it. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:31, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does the lead really need to be so long?

The leads of other UK Prime Ministers, such as Margaret Thatcher and Gordon Brown, are not as lengthy as this one. The lead for US President George W. Bush, whose popularity similarly declined as a result of the Iraq War, is also much shorter than this. The lead here should only include the most important details of Tony Blair's premiership, other aspects of it can be discussed on the article Premiership of Tony Blair. I don't see any reason why Blair alone should have an overly long lead. HighlyLogicalVulcan (talk) 16:06, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It has since been shorted and reworded.

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I want to change where it states where Tony Blair is ranked amongst British prime ministers, it states that he is ranked average alongside John Major and David Cameron even though he is ranked in a different category above both of them amongst academics and historians (Blair was ranked as the third best post-war prime minister by the University of Leeds in 2021 marginally behind Margaret Thatcher). He is ranked by most academics and scholars as one of the best prime ministers post World War II not as average as shown by the repeated rankings by the University of Leeds made since 2004. Popular opinion polls tend to have a heavy bias towards well known or recent prime ministers e.g., Winston Churchill ranked as the 2nd best prime minister after World War II even though most academics rank his postwar premiership as average. OllieX2000 (talk) 14:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is based on Historical rankings of prime ministers of the United Kingdom which is quoted in this article. Personally I take these rankings with a pinch of salt because they are subjective at best. It's true that the University of Leeds rankings have Blair in third place behind Attlee and Thatcher, so maybe the wording of the lead section should be clarified.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 14:26, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could the wording be phrased differently as a result, he's not regarded as average by experts and is not seen at the same level as either Major or Cameron as shown by academic rankings. OllieX2000 (talk) 16:08, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, even in the Historical rankings of prime ministers of the United Kingdom article he is rated above average. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 13:38, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Blair was re-elected for a third term with another landslide in 2005"

Was his win in the 2005 a landslide? His first two were, but by the time of the 2005 election, the Iraq War had happened, which negatively effected both Labour's poll ratings and Blair's approval ratings. This resulted in his party's victory in the 2005 election but with a substantially reduced majority when compared to his landslide victories in 1997 and 2001. While Blair got a majority in the 2005 election, I don't believe it was by enough to be considered a landslide (when David Cameron became Conservative leader after the election, his party polled higher than Labour in every subsequent local election during Blair's remaining years as PM). 2.97.212.181 (talk) 21:22, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To state that, “Blair was re-elected in a second landslide…” when referring to parliamentary elections is incorrect. It implies that the U.K. prime minister is elected by the public to that position, when when he or she is not. A better way of stating election results would, in this and similar cases, be, “The Blair-led Labour Party was re-elected in a second landslide…” (and third, etc.). Steveedee (talk) 03:35, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the lead for Margaret Thatcher also has the "re-elected in a second landslide…" problem. Both the leads should be tweaked to reflect the fact the UK doesn't have a presiential system. --2.97.212.181 (talk) 13:13, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]